Factors Hindering Partnership Working - Research Paper Example

Partnership Working Introduction Partnership working has become an imperative feature of all public sector services as this concept plays a significant role in modernisation programme across the globe. The idea of partnership working is well supported by financial incentives so as to bring the competence of potential partners together. Partnership working can be defined as “a coalition of organisations and individuals from more than one sector who agree to work together for a common aim or a set of compatible aims, and who share resources and responsibilities and agree to work together in a co-operative and mutually supportive fashion” (Clark, 2002). Partnership working is evident within and between public sector organisations, within and between professions, and between people or organisations who provide services and those who use them. In addition, this concept plays a pivotal role in the division of services. With the advent of partnership working concept, healthcare and social services are delivered more coherently and effectively. Under partnership working, each participant can improve his operational efficiency by utilising additional resources (which other partners bring), pooling ideas, and other synergies of combined working. However, well communication, co-ordination, and co-operation among partners are essential to take complete advantages of partnership working. This paper will explore whether or not the success of partnership working relies on organisational factors as much as the ability of professionals to work together. Partnership working in health and social care services Nowadays, governments are striving to establish a system which promotes the integration of health and social services, placing users at the centre of all service policies. Policy makers are of the view that partnership working between public sector and voluntary or other community groups would greatly assist the promotion of an effective health and social care (Department of Health, 2010). Economies maintain that combined working in healthcare sector would trim down the increasing healthcare costs. Healthcare authorities are nowadays increasingly working with local authorities on health improvement programmes in order to ensure effective circulation of information and ideas. Studies indicate that partnership working may assist healthcares to improve their service by means of pooled funds and effective distribution of various functions. Governmental authorities greatly support the idea of partnership working in healthcare by offering financial incentives and other rewards to participants. Many of the regulators are of the view that collaboration between social services and primary healthcare would offer advantages to the economy. Factors hindering partnership working Researches on this field indicate that an array of factors hinder the successful completion of partnership working. In the opinion of Williamson (2001, p.120), structural issues, procedural issues, professional issues, financial issues, and policy issues are the major inhibiting factors to partnership working. As the author points out, organisations generally like to operate as closed system. However, partnership working necessitates the surrender of organisational power and this condition adversely affects partnership working (lecture note). Obviously, it is not an easy task to achieve organisational change because it is a complex process that requires the sanction of different management levels. To illustrate, health and social care organisations often need to form partnerships with agencies of entirely different size and resources in order to achieve their objectives effectively. According to Banks (2002), geographical boundaries also pose significant challenges to partnership working and service delivery. There may be vertical and horizontal internal divisions even within the overall boundaries and this worse situation may impede the successful advancement of partnership working. In addition to structural differences, procedural differences can also be a barrier to joint planning. As stated, “agencies have different lines of accountability and allow different degrees of discretion to frontline workers often depending on their status and degree of professionalisation” (Williamson, 2001, p.120). In the opinion of many researchers, ego complex is the most observable professional issue in partnership working. The participants of the joint work sometimes may be boastful. This behavioural issue would probably hurt the common aim of the project. In addition, different agencies may set different financial provisions for their projects; and this would inhibit the idea of joint project planning. It also may not be practical for organisations to frame a common financial strategy because each firm’s level of access to resources would be different (lecture note). In addition, operational policies notably vary from organisation to organisation and this situation raises potential challenges to partnership working. It is clear that the changes in organisational policies may result in strategic conflicts which in turn would significantly affect the flow of joint planning. Likewise, since different agencies give priority to different aspects, such a condition may negate the ultimate aims of partnership working. Under most of the joint working projects, partners are not well aware of their duties and responsibilities. Differences in employment conditions between agencies may turn out to be a barrier to integration, without which a partnership working is ineffective. Many of the management experts are of the belief that poor staff morale and unethical practices from other partners may limit the scope of partnership working. Involvement of a large number of partners will also definitely impact the smooth flow of joint planning and operations. In addition, association of a wrong partner can have an adverse effect on the successful completion of a partnership work. Frequent shift of organisational structures will certainly impede the progress of a partnership programme. Finally, lack of effective communication channels and language problems may raise potential challenges to partnership working in the long run. Central concepts of partnership As discussed above, partnership is a broad and complex concept that can be hindered by numerous factors. Nowadays, the two terms partnership and collaboration are used interchangeably. Admittedly, both these terms reflect the idea of ‘joined up working’. While analysing academic literature regarding partnership working, it is evident that this concept reflects the view of sharing and agreement, with a specific focus on business (lecture note). Literature reviews show that policy changes have notably influenced the use of the term ‘partnership’ in healthcare as well as social care settings. Hence, the notion of partnership is heavily subjected to modifications in accordance with policy changes. Hence, the idea of partnership working has significantly changed over the last five decades. By the end of the 20th century, policy makers emphasised the need of partnerships between service providers as they believed that community development, joint employment, and improved education were essential to address the needs of the local population (DH, 2004). During this period, a range of theoretical models were proposed to encourage the idea of partnership working. However, most of the models failed to address the hindering factors discussed in the above session. Currently, regulators follow a ‘three way partnership’ approach between health and social care settings and ultimate beneficiaries or service users. Although this approach does not include a joint agreement regarding standards of service providers and nature of services to be provided, this structure is seen as a means for eradicating professional issues in partnership working and effectively responding to local needs. Currently, the term partnership gives the view that all partners have an equal right and obligation to participate in a joint working project and they will be equally affected by the benefits or demerits arising out of the partnership. Although, degree of commitment is subjected to contextual variations, all the parties have an implied obligation to work together to meet high ethical standards. One of the central concepts of partnership working is that partners involved in a project have a shared responsibility to assess the need for action and to decide the type of action needs to be taken in response to an identified issue (HM Government, 2010). In addition, all the concerned partners also have a joint responsibility to determine the most effective way of strategy implementation. Some other models indicate that every partnership working involves negotiation between two different organisations or agencies committed to working together; and this type of negotiation must be of long term in nature. Modern partnership frameworks emphasise that the concept of working together has to involve a clear intension of securing some specific benefits that are not normally offered by a single provider acting alone. In order to eradicate the pitfalls in partnership working, all partners should keep their individuality and they must recognise the fact that every action they take will influence the overall functioning of the system. Above all, it would be difficult to complete partnership working successfully unless services are organised around the users. Hence, mutual trust and equality are two major elements of every partnership working deed. A number of partnership working models have been developed for the last decade to strengthen the framework of joint planning. A study conducted by the Department for Employment and Education (Social Research, 2002) suggested ‘5 vital lessons’ for successful partnership working. They are; purpose and leadership, outcomes and customer focus, culture and communication, managing for performance, and learning and innovation (ibid). Various partnership models recommend health and social care agencies to work together for effectively addressing health inequalities. These models specifically instruct local service providers to work jointly to address various health determinants including poverty, housing and educational attainment, and employment. According to Darzi (2008), health and social care issues have nowadays become more complex and multi-dimensional in nature. As a result, older and static welfare models became outdated, and it persuaded health and social care providers to allow service users to be more involved in the development and provision of different services (Department of Health, 2005). Researchers have identified a close relationship between illness and poverty. This finding influenced regulators to think about the collaboration between healthcare services and social care. Many of the recently developed partnership approaches argue that improved educational attainment as well as improved health standards for children and young people can be achieved through well planned joined working (Children and young People’s Unit, 2001). However, it must be noted that none of the existing partnership concepts are comprehensive enough to ensure cent percent success to partnership working. Therefore, it is very difficult to empirically realise the benefits of partnership working even though the potentiality of this concept is hardly disputed. Impact of organisational factors The above sessions clearly point to the fact that partnership relies on organisational factors as much as the ability of professionals to work together. For the effective collaboration between two partners, they must have a common goal, and this requirement necessitates the process of organisational change. In other words, organisations need to change their traditional policies and practices while jointly working with another agency in order for achieving a common goal. The process of organisational change involves a number of phases; and hence two different organisations cannot integrate their processes and strategies overnight. Audit Commission states that “making partnership work effectively is one of the toughest challenges facing public sector managers” as a result of the existence of a range of internal and external organisational factors (cited in Powell and Glendinning, 2002, p.6). It is obvious that partnership working involves several statutory services; and each of these services may be constrained by its respective frameworks, codes of practice, and scarcity of financial resources. Contestation and conflict can be widely visible in partnership working due to the effect of social constructiveness of teamwork in a partnership venture. Ambiguity associated with discourses and other practices in partnership is one of the major organisational factors affecting the success of the project. According to Beresford and Branfield (2006), recent studies show that a quest to profit maximisation would not effectively serve different service user needs as the most significant determinant of practice. However, it seems that majority of the participants of partnership working give first priority to their financial interests rather than service user satisfaction. This approach may negatively affect the progress of a joint project even thought the professionals involved are highly eligible. Partnership working experiences from social and health care sectors indicate that primary focus is given to bureaucracy and budget management rather than service user needs. As discussed earlier, organisational factors including man, money, and policies can have a notable impact on partnership working. If organisations possess flexible policies and have easy access to resources, they can be more efficient in partnership working. In contrast, an organisation that follows regulative policies and having limited availability of resources may not be efficient while jointly working towards a common goal. In many cases, it has been observed that the time taken for establishing trustworthy relationships between partners is considerably much. This condition can have serious impacts on the development of a partnership venture. Empirical evidences suggest that stable administrative support and resources are essential throughout the lifetime of partnership working so as to ensure the successful completion of the project (communitycare.co.uk, 2004). The dominance of small and medium sized firms and unorganised nature of community pose potential challenges to the concept of partnership working between private sector and communities. In addition, geographical differences would significantly affect number and efficacy of partnership working. Bhutta (2002) opines that partnership funding is an essential aspect to be dealt with while forming a partnership working strategy. It is clear that a joint working project would not achieve its ultimate objectives unless the partners can ensure timely and uninterrupted flow of finance. It is widely observed that partners involved in a joint project often tend to divert the use of their budgeted finance from the existing project to other more productive ventures because of the absence of strictly defined partnership working policies. Such frequent strategic amendments may seriously threaten the feasibility of a partnership project. Hence, developing a global approach towards partnership working in health and social care would be an effective strategy to eliminate the pitfalls of this concept to some extent. In addition, development agencies have to directly intervene in areas where partnership working is poor. In order to make a partnership venture effective, it must be considered in the context of broader regeneration strategies. Undoubtedly, scope of every partnership working project hugely depends on the degree of sustainability of regeneration strategies developed other than the period of partnership funding. The success of partnership working largely relies on the establishment phase as most of the partnerships would be fairly stable once they are set up. In some cases, it has been identified that external organisational changes necessitate the recruitment of new partners even after the formation of partnership. Higher levels of bureaucracy and increased volume of paperwork often raises troublesome difficulties to partners. When the partners involved in a project are from distinct cultures, it may take long to integrate different cultures and to establish a common code of practice. Conclusion In total, an array of organisational factors influences the success of partnerships as much as the ability of professionals to integrate and work together. Structural, procedural, and policy issues greatly hinder the effective flow of partnership working. None of the conceptual frameworks till date could eliminate these troubles. Every partnership working concept is centred on the idea of joined up working and nowadays it is interchangeably used with the term collaboration. Currently, the framework of ‘three way partnership’ is the most widely accepted partnership approach as it is more extensive than any other. In sum, it is important to incorporate a range of organisational factors to ensure the success of a partnership working project. References Banks, P 2002, ‘Partnerships under pressure: A commentary on progress in partnership- working between the NHS and local government’, King’s Fund: Health & Social Care, Policy & Development Department, pp.1-17. Beresford, P & Branfield, F 2006, ‘Developing inclusive partnerships: User-defined outcomes, networking and knowledge- A case study’, Health and Social Care in the Community, vol.14, no.5, pp.436-444. Bhutta, M 2002, ‘Shared aspirations: The role of the voluntary and community sector in improving the funding relationship with government’, National Council for Voluntary Organizations, pp.1-45, Viewed 10 January 2012, Clark, C 2002, ‘The step by step guide to successful partnership working for voluntary and community organizations’, Regional Action and Involvement South East, pp.1-96. Children and young People’s Unit 2001, ‘Core principles for the involvement of children and young people’, Learning to Listen, pp.1-36, Viewed 10 January 2012, . Communitycare.co.uk 2004, ‘News’, Viewed 10 January 2012, Department of Health 2010, ‘Transforming community services: The assurance and approvals process for PCT­provided community services, p.1-16, Viewed 10 January 2012, DH: Department of Health 2004, ‘Making partnership work for patients, carers and service users: A strategic agreement between the Department of Health, the NHS and the voluntary and community sector’, Publications Policy and Guidance, Viewed 10 January 2012, Darzi, L 2008, ‘High quality care for all: NHS next stage review final report’, Department of Health: Publications Policy and Guidance, Viewed 10 January 2012, Department of Health 2005, ‘Creating a patient-led NHS: Delivering the NHS improvement Plan’, Publications Policy and Guidance, Viewed 10 January 2012, Glendinning, C, Powell, M & Runnery, K 2002, Partnerships, New Labour and the Governance of Welfare, Policy Press, UK. HM Government 2010, ‘Working together to safeguard children: A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children’, 1-390, Viewed 10 January 2012, Social Research 2002, ‘Partnership working: Key issues around evaluation’, Office of the Chief Researcher, pp.1-13, Viewed 10 January 2012, Williamson, V 2001, ‘The Potential of project status to support partnerships’, in Balloch, S & Taylor, M (ed), Partnership Working: Policy and Practice, The Policy Press, UK, p.120. Read More